Case Summary (G.R. No. 224936)
Background and Antecedent Proceedings
In February 2011 NGCP filed a Complaint for Expropriation in the RTC of Mariveles, Bataan, to acquire 101,290.42 sqm of land for the Mariveles–Limay 230 kV Transmission Line Project after negotiations with PAFC and co-defendant Orica Philippines, Inc. failed. PAFC and Orica opposed, arguing the land was devoted to a public petrochemical purpose and thus immune from NGCP’s eminent domain.
Statutory Evolution of the Petrochemical Estate
The parcel originated under Executive Order No. 48 (1919), was withdrawn for industrial reservation by Presidential Proclamations No. 361 (1968) and No. 630 (1969), transferred to PNOC by Presidential Decree No. 949 (1976) and expanded by P.D. 1803 (1981). In 1993 PNOC Petrochemicals Development Corp. (later PAFC) was incorporated to operate the zone. Republic Act No. 10516 (2013) further broadened permissible energy-related and commercial uses.
Procedural History and Assailed Order
On February 11, 2016, the RTC issued an Order of Expropriation under Rule 67, Section 4, overruling PAFC’s defenses and directing appointment of commissioners to determine just compensation. A motion for reconsideration was denied on April 18, 2016, prompting PAFC’s direct Rule 45 petition before the Supreme Court.
Issues Presented
- Whether PAFC properly appealed the order of expropriation directly via Rule 45.
- Whether NGCP validly exercised its eminent domain authority under R.A. 9511 over PAFC’s land.
Proper Remedy and Direct Appeal
Rule 67, Section 4 explicitly permits appeal of an expropriation order. Where only questions of law arise, Rule 41 allows direct filing before the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45. PAFC’s appeal, styled as certiorari, involved purely legal issues and was properly lodged.
Scope of Delegated Eminent Domain
Eminent domain is an inherent sovereign power primarily vested in the legislature but delegable to agencies and franchisees. Under R.A. 9511 NGCP may expropriate “private property actually necessary” for its transmission system, subject to statutory limits and payment of just compensation.
Classification of the Subject Property
Under Civil Code Articles 419–422, land of public dominion is inalienable and outside commerce, whereas patrimonial property is held by the State in its private capacity. P.D. 949, as amended by R.A. 10516, expressly declared the industrial zone alienable, disposable, and leasable to private entities, converting it into patrimonial (private) property.
Applicability of Eminent Domain Authority
Because the subject parcel is patrimonial property, NGCP’s delegated power under R.A. 9511 extends to its expropriation. PAFC’s contention that land devoted to a p
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 224936)
Facts and Antecedent Proceedings
- On February 9, 2011, NGCP filed a Complaint for Expropriation seeking to take 101,290.42 sqm in Barangays Batangas II (Mariveles) and Lamao (Limay), Bataan, for the Mariveles–Limay 230 kV Transmission Line Project.
- NGCP holds a franchise under R.A. No. 9511 authorizing it to construct, expand, operate, maintain and exercise eminent domain over “private property actually necessary” for its transmission system.
- The subject land formed part of a larger petrochemical industrial zone established by EO No. 48 (1919), modified by PP Nos. 361 (1968) and 630 (1969), transferred to PNOC under PD No. 949 (1976), enlarged by PD No. 1803 (1981), and later governed by R.A. No. 10516 (2013) with IRR DC2013-06-0011, which expressly declared the zone alienable and disposable for private enterprises.
- PNOC Petrochemicals Development Corp. (PPDC), later renamed PNOC Alternative Fuels Corp. (PAFC), was organized in 1993 to administer the industrial estate; Orica Philippines, Inc. leased and operated within it.
Procedural Posture
- RTC Branch 4, Mariveles, Bataan, denied PAFC’s and Orica’s defenses and issued an Order of Expropriation on February 11, 2016, directing appointment of commissioners and reception of evidence on just compensation.
- PAFC’s motion for reconsideration was denied on April 18, 2016.
- PAFC filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 45 directly before the Supreme Court, challenging the expropriation order as improp